I'm in an Armored State of Mind

In my role as editor of this magazine, I was interviewed by Al and Stacy a couple of weeks ago. Al and Stacy host a morning drive-time talk radio show in Charlotte, N.C.

By Lew McCreary

May 01, 2003 — CSO — The topic, in a fairly general way, was security. Al asked me about CSOs and what they do. Then Stacy mentioned that she'd recently seen an ad for an armored car. And what did I make of that?

"Well," I said, in a slightly-too-snarky way, "urban assault vehicles have been growing in popularity for a long time now. But I think their value is more psychological than actual."

"You mean they don't work?" said Stacy.

"Well, I don't know. I've never driven one...."

At which point I backtracked, thinking that a discussion of armored vehicles was taking me way out of my depth.

What I wish I'd saidwhat I should have saidwas that part of the essential skill set of a CSO is to know when an armored car is a good security investment, as opposed to a big fat, bulletproof waste of money. You can go out and buy a lot of security, but it's also easy to overbuy against some highly unlikely risks. So maybe a bulletproof car and a well-trained driver make a great investment in some kidnap-happy equatorial nation. But in White Plains or Cleveland Heights or Alpharetta? Maybe not so great.

Nonetheless, after Al and Stacy ditched me I got to thinking about security as a state of mind. Is there quantifiable ROI in spending money to make people feel safe, as opposed to actually being safe? How much of the visible security in the world is real rather than psychological? To be fully effective, should security be visible or invisible? Do bollards, jersey barriers and impromptu guard posts on the streets of Washington (to say nothing of the rocket launcher adorning the grounds of the Washington Monument) add substantively or only perceptually to the sense of security a citizen feels? Should security be made to blend in better aesthetically? (See "Hidden Strengths," Page 44, Senior Editor Daintry Duffy's story about efforts to make the nation's capital safer in more attractive, less noticeable ways.) Or should it be impressively obvious?

Pundits have observed that America is an exceptionally fearful place post-9/11. But the trend toward a siege mentality has been in motion for far longer than that. As the rate of violent crime has fallen sharply over the past two decades, the average American's sense of vulnerability to crime has soared. And what's with that? The popularity of SUVs is partly based on a yearning for protection from the natural and man-made menaces that run riot outside of the passenger compartment. Advertising campaigns have often focused on the slew of freak dangers one avoids or surmounts by driving around in a four-wheeled fortress.

The relationship between actual and perceived risks can be tenuous, and buying an armored vehicle may, in the end, amount to treating an imaginary illness. Still, we wonder whether there may be some merit to the idea that investments in simply feeling safer should have a place among the priorities of CSOs. The challenge, as always, will be to find metrics that can put a value on soothed anxieties.

Let us know what you think.

-Lew McCreary mccreary@cxo.com

Read more about critical infrastructure in CSOonline's Critical Infrastructure section.

Other stories by Lew McCreary

• Print